Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755610AbbLDIjT (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Dec 2015 03:39:19 -0500 Received: from dgate10.ts.fujitsu.com ([80.70.172.49]:26318 "EHLO dgate10.ts.fujitsu.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755456AbbLDIjR (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Dec 2015 03:39:17 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: s=s1536a; d=ts.fujitsu.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=X-SBRSScore:Received:Received:From:To:CC:Date:Subject: Thread-Topic:Thread-Index:Message-ID:References: In-Reply-To:Accept-Language:Content-Language: X-MS-Has-Attach:X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:acceptlanguage: Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; b=nky1+f6TASVqf+3TR75CgXc2/H60HbgEHv+TQyLFPM3d92mxONJUzgsv Vv4rMojOxdg88ZtFAnTC4JZZylwP111KL1nIaSfW6bkoDrCUasoMN4wkC Eab0sfFxswMbdhXwEAHJyFaMevhBBhbRpcsCdlQ+ka4QltCBdoDUuK6yL 1CcRLM1GCdKzsq/SB+g/Po1ryPlQXrajjZHTQ/91kaBU4h1cNzpshpCNG tbt+Bu2h68/tqDxWV1dMDY+LGmyPD; X-SBRSScore: None From: "Wilck, Martin" To: Jason Gunthorpe CC: Jarkko Sakkinen , "tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Uwe Kleine-K??nig Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2015 09:39:14 +0100 Subject: Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] tpm_tis: Clean up force module parameter Thread-Topic: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] tpm_tis: Clean up force module parameter Thread-Index: AdEub0GXsdl9Q2WxRLOhLMadnJ1NwA== Message-ID: References: <1448996309-15220-1-git-send-email-jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com> <20151201213351.GC5071@intel.com> <20151202182726.GB30972@obsidianresearch.com> <20151202191155.GA2832@obsidianresearch.com> <20151203170041.GA32175@obsidianresearch.com> In-Reply-To: <20151203170041.GA32175@obsidianresearch.com> Accept-Language: de-DE, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: de-DE, en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from base64 to 8bit by mail.home.local id tB48dO1R020616 Content-Length: 1554 Lines: 40 On Do, 2015-12-03 at 10:00 -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 09:30:30AM +0100, Wilck, Martin wrote: > > On Mi, 2015-12-02 at 12:11 -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > > > > > What is the address tpm_tis should be using? I see two things, it > > > > either uses the x86 default address or it expects the ACPI to have a > > > > MEM resource. AFAIK ACPI should never rely on hard wired addresses, so > > > > I removed that code in this series. Perhaps tpm_tis should be using > > > > control_area_pa ? Will ACPI ever present a struct resource? (if yes, > > > > why isn't tpm_crb using one?) > > > > > > Is then still a problem. On Martin's system the MSFT0101 device does > > > not have a struct resource attached to it. Does any system, or is this > > > just dead code? > > > > ACPI defines a mem resource corresponding to the standard TIS memory > > area on my system, and it used to be detected fine with Jarkko's patch. > > Somehow your latest changes broke it, not sure why. > > Are you certain? Based on what you sent me, that output is only > possible if there is no mem resource. Yes, I am certain. I checked the DSDT, and I put a debug statement right after the resource detection in tpm_tis. Martin > With the prior arrangement no mem resource means the x86 default > address is used, which is the only way I can see how your system > works. > > Jason ????{.n?+???????+%?????ݶ??w??{.n?+????{??G?????{ay?ʇڙ?,j??f???h?????????z_??(?階?ݢj"???m??????G????????????&???~???iO???z??v?^?m???? ????????I?